Iraq war 'waged on false intelligence'

[Timber Loftis]

Let's not forget Food for Oil, or the dirty deeds what were done by the Klinton Krime Kommission from 1992-2000 both to make cash and cover tracks.

Are you suggesting there is a connection between Clinton and Oil-for-Food scandal? Or are you referring to different "dirty deeds?" Or are you just spewing forth ignorance in the face of lacking anything intelligent to say? Inquiring minds want to know.

[Black Baron]

Dirty deeds would be Monika gate and the kosovo war that was used to hush the monica scandal. Clinton also sinned in israel, he signed Oslo, he gave legetimacy to the ArchTerrorist Yaser Arafat, even if not knowlingly. The Conspiracy with The assasination of Rabin stinks to hell from USA invovelment.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: quote: Let's not forget Food for Oil, or the dirty deeds what were done by the Klinton Krime Kommission from 1992-2000 both to make cash and cover tracks.

Are you suggesting there is a connection between Clinton and Oil-for-Food scandal? Or are you referring to different "dirty deeds?" Or are you just spewing forth ignorance in the face of lacking anything intelligent to say? Inquiring minds want to know. [/QUOTE]I Don't Know if Clinton had anything to do with the Oil for Food, I doubt it! as much as I'd like to hang something else on "de Sleek Miester" I just can't go there. But what is going to be interesting is how much of the UN's investigation of It's self on the Oil for Food scandle comes out. Call me crazy but I bet very little since the office investigating allready has some leaks about how they turned a blind eye while the Oil for Food was going on. IIRC some guy was fired/retired/resigned when he brought it to the attention of the "head UN Enforcement Puke".

[John D Harris]

#3
It could be possible but, barring any evidence to that fact I personally doubt it. I have a good friend, well a mentor, who is close personal friends, (eats at each others houses and when he is in Washington D.C. he stays at the Senators house instead of a hotel), with a ranking member of the Senate Intel Committee. From waht I've been able to gather the Sentate Intel Committee recieves the same briefings as the President, if not daily at least weekly.

As I said in my PM I beleive the CIA after hearing so much grief about not conecting the dots before 9/11, tried to conect any dot they could even if the dots didn't go together. The CIA needs more people on the ground so they can use that intel in conjuction with their electronic intel. Even then the best they can do is probibly get it to 90%, that's a personal guess, since I'm not in the Intel community.

[Oblivion437]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Are you suggesting there is a connection between Clinton and Oil-for-Food scandal? Or are you referring to different "dirty deeds?" Or are you just spewing forth ignorance in the face of lacking anything intelligent to say? Inquiring minds want to know.

Well, actually they were seperate items. As far as I know, the Klintons weren't connected to food-for-oil (though that particular thing does send UN credibility on whether to go or not go into Iraq into the trash heap) nor did they profiteer from it in any way.

However, they did sell certain...things...to the Chinese, and then set orders and directives in place that covered their tracks, and also fragmented our intelligence gathering capabilities.

[Timber Loftis]

I'm actually not going to derail this thread by defending the Clinton actions or correcting any parts of your or Baron's posts that I may disagree with. The topic is plenty complicated without me mixing apples in with the oranges. So, I guess I just demurr.

[Gab]

Originally posted by John D Harris: quote: Originally posted by Gab: quote: Originally posted by Khazadman Risen: If there are problems with our intelligence agencies it's because the dems have been trying their best to destroy them for the last few decades.

You always try to blame the Democrats and the left for everything! What proof do you have of this anyway? Why not blame or accuse Bush of being a warmonger and foolishly believing the flawed intilligence or even just plain lying to go to war? [/QUOTE]Why do you NOT even mention the DEMOCRATS on the Senate Intel. Comm. that VOTED for the war, and came out and said things LIKE, "Iraq is an eminate threat"? Or prehaps the Dems that while running for office in 2002 said "If you don't believe Iraq has WoMD's DO NOT vote for me." Why oh why is nearly everybody jumping on the BUSH DID it on purpose bandwagon when the report CEALRY states there is ZERO/NADA/NO evidence that any of the intel was politicly motovated? But I guess to admitt that would mean President Bush was acting on what he was told and not in some wild wacko far-out conspricay started before he was elected. Lord knows he couldn't possibly be doing what he thought was best, he HAS to be forcing the CIA to make-up intel. Why he even forced the CIA to make-up the Intel years before, he was elected to be president of the Unitied States of America, while he was still a govenor of the state of Texas.

Wow! I never realised as Govenor Bush had so much power to be able to manipulate the CIA, con President Clinton into saying that Iraq was working on Nuclear weapons, and launch missle to attack Iraq's capitabilities. And send nearly every Dem that is now criticizing President Bush, to support President Clinton's attack and defend his statements about Iraq's WoMDs. Govenor Bush even made the UN pass several resolutions about Iraq'a WoMD's, long before he became President. Amazing the mind control powers of then Govenor Bush, to make the Dems. support attacking Iraq when Bill Clinton was President. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm wonder why President Bush is not using those miraclious powers now that He is President.


****If you want to know who the Dems were that made the statments I mentioned, you may want to check out the Democratic Presidental ticket.**** [/QUOTE]That's acually a very good point there John D. Harris. I do believe that the CIA and the other intelligence agencies were very flawed. However, I do believe or suspect that it's possible (even though there's no proof of it) that Bush could've manipulated CIA (which has been mentioned seemingly as a conspircay theory) or recieved seperate information.

As for the Democrats on the Senate Intel. Comm., they were decieved by false intelligence. Many of them have now stated if they knew what they know now before the war, they wouldn't have voted for it.

[ 07-13-2004, 07:22 PM: Message edited by: Gab ]

[Oblivion437]

The CIA has been hamstrung since Klinton signed his directive which effectively made cooperation and combined intelligence impossible.

[Timber Loftis]

Despite your conspiracy theories, Oblivion, it's not so simple that you can ascribe blame to President Clinton. The FBI was set up to PROSECUTE people, while the CIA was set up to gather all pertinent evidence. A lot of evidence the CIA relies on is not admissible in court -- so it would have been no use to the FBI under the old model. Accordingly, the FBI would not rely on such information, even though it may have been accurate. It's a much bigger issue to tackle than just saying Clinton screwed it up -- which, he did not. As support for it not being really Clinton's fault, I'll cite President GWB, who often refers to his "predecessor's" efforts, and has not once slighted them. Neither has Cheney, and he is the current "pulpit" and "big mouth" of the party, so he would have cited such Democrud problems if he could.

[Dedzy]

Timber, or anyone else who wants to take a swing at this:
So let's say you get appointed to replace George Tenet, and whoever gets elected in November decides to keep you. What would you do to improve the intelligence situation?

IMO, This intelligence issue has nothing more to do with GWB than it did Clinton. It has everything to do with an agency that is 100% unaccountable to anyone besides themselves.